SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Sample Prep / Library Generation



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RNA-Seq: HITS-CLIP: panoramic views of protein-RNA regulation in living cells. Newsbot! Literature Watch 1 09-11-2015 12:48 AM
RNA-Seq: RNA-sequence analysis of human B-cells. Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 05-04-2011 03:50 AM
RNA-Seq: RNA-Seq Analysis of Sulfur-Deprived Chlamydomonas Cells Reveals Aspects of A Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 07-01-2010 03:40 AM
RNA-Seq: Transcriptome and targetome analysis in MIR155 expressing cells using RNA-se Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 06-30-2010 03:00 AM
RNA seq libraries from few hundred cells artem.men Sample Prep / Library Generation 2 03-02-2010 05:04 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-09-2011, 10:27 AM   #1
irit
Junior Member
 
Location: Pacific Northwest

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5
Default RNA-seq from single cells?

Does anyone here have experience with this? Does anyone know of a good protocol with consistent results?
irit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2013, 04:38 PM   #2
CTC
Junior Member
 
Location: Bay area

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
Default

I would like to do this as well but have not figured it out. Have you?
CTC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2013, 01:17 AM   #3
balaji
Junior Member
 
Location: Europe

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9
Default

are you looking for something like this.. Cell article, probably I should look for some public data if there is any?
balaji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2013, 03:15 AM   #4
TonyBrooks
Senior Member
 
Location: London

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 298
Default

I recommend using the Clontech SMARTer PCR kit (if you can afford it).
We have some nice data from single Molt4 cells.
I can't comment on consistency of data as we've only done it once with 4 cells.
TonyBrooks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2013, 10:24 AM   #5
CTC
Junior Member
 
Location: Bay area

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5
Default

Thanks for the article. But without detailed protocol it is hard to replicate the experiment.
I have tried SMARTer PCR kit but it did not work in my hands. The expected yield for a single cell is 7 ng, the negative control yield is similar.
CTC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 03:14 AM   #6
daantje
Junior Member
 
Location: switzerland

Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4
Default

Hi Yes, would also be interested in hearing if there are tricks for the SMART kit. I tried and with a 10ng input of control RNA, I only get 500pg of amplified cDNA. Even though the size is correct and I am happy to get to this point, still my yield is much lower then suggested in the manual. I have not yet proceeded with library generation.
daantje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 05:59 AM   #7
solidestcloud
Junior Member
 
Location: Cambridge

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1
Default

I'm not sure if any of you have seen this?http://www.fluidigm.com/home/fluidig...-6199%20A1.pdf
We have just released a Single Cell mRNAseq protocol for the C1 system. It utilises the SMARTer chemistry but miniaturises it making it much cheaper.
solidestcloud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 03:37 AM   #8
MMaria
Junior Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by solidestcloud View Post
I'm not sure if any of you have seen this?http://www.fluidigm.com/home/fluidig...-6199%20A1.pdf
We have just released a Single Cell mRNAseq protocol for the C1 system. It utilises the SMARTer chemistry but miniaturises it making it much cheaper.
Interesting. Does anybody knows how much does it cost or which labs already have it?
MMaria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 06:13 AM   #9
kwaraska
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston,MA

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 120
Default

We are getting one in March but we are in Boston so that may not help you but it could help others.
kwaraska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:03 AM   #10
daantje
Junior Member
 
Location: switzerland

Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4
Default

Kwaraska - did you test the instrument? or have you seen generated data?
daantje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 12:30 PM   #11
kwaraska
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston,MA

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 120
Default

I have not tested it but we hosted a seminar with actual data and my boss has had meetings with the supplier and he has seen it in action.
kwaraska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 09:02 AM   #12
GW_OK
Senior Member
 
Location: Oklahoma

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 368
Default

Saw a demo of it at AGBT. $150k for the box is what I was told, with $23/sample all-in library costs. cDNA is generated by the SMARTer kit with the Illumina library made with Nextera from the cDNA. Does 96 cells in one go.
GW_OK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 01:27 AM   #13
Simone78
Senior Member
 
Location: Sweden

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 173
Default

a detailed protocol for single-cell seq is described in a paper published last year by our group: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820318
the CEL-Seq protocol (published in Cell Reports at the end of last year) is targeting only the 3īend of mRNAs, while the Smart-Seq aims to get full-length mRNAs. Another method, STRT (Islam et al., Genome Res. 2011 & Nat. Prot. 2012) captures the 5ī-end only instead. It depends what one is looking for.
Simone78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2014, 10:17 PM   #14
liaojinyue
Junior Member
 
Location: hk

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
Default

Hi, daantje, have you figured out the cause of low yield? I tried the kit recently and also encountered similar problem, only got less than 1ng amplified cDNA from 500pg input RNA provided in the kit after 14 cycles. I would really appreciate if anyone can offer some suggestions for this kit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daantje View Post
Hi Yes, would also be interested in hearing if there are tricks for the SMART kit. I tried and with a 10ng input of control RNA, I only get 500pg of amplified cDNA. Even though the size is correct and I am happy to get to this point, still my yield is much lower then suggested in the manual. I have not yet proceeded with library generation.
liaojinyue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2014, 01:14 AM   #15
Simone78
Senior Member
 
Location: Sweden

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 173
Default

we have recently published a paper where we describe Smart-seq2, an improvement of the Smarter kit. Check it out! You donīneed any kit to make your cDNA and youīre going to save a lot of money!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24385147
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24056875
Simone78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2014, 01:57 AM   #16
liaojinyue
Junior Member
 
Location: hk

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
Default

We are buying reagents for smart-seq2. It turns out that TSO is not very cheap(~750usd for the smallest scale 250nmole)? Meanwhile I want to make sure there is nothing wrong with my technique otherwise will face the same problem in the future. Any idea what could possibly go wrong?
liaojinyue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2014, 11:45 PM   #17
liaojinyue
Junior Member
 
Location: hk

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
Default strange cDNA profile after SMART-Seq2

Hi, Simone, we are testing SMART-seq2 protocol in our lab recently. It's quite impressive in terms of cDNA yield after preamplification. However, we notice that the our cDNA library is not as uniform as it should be. Although we can see it covers the range from several hundred to thousands, there are several intense peaks with the highest of around 1800bp.
We tried different TSO concentration and cycle numbers but did not see any improvement. Please see attachment 1 (cDNA is purified prior to bioanalyzer analysis)
We also tried to replace some component or add additional bead purification after first strand synthesis. The oligo dT30 primer provided in the clontech smart-seq kit did show some improvement while there are more concatmer formation with additional bead purification step. Please see testing result 2 (We want to see whether there is concatemer formation so we load the PCR product in bioanalyzer without purification).

I think I'm close to a successful run but also so desperate that I can not solve this problem. Could anyone please give me some suggestions? What are these bands and how to get rid of them? Thanks a lot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simone78 View Post
we have recently published a paper where we describe Smart-seq2, an improvement of the Smarter kit. Check it out! You donīneed any kit to make your cDNA and youīre going to save a lot of money!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24385147
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24056875
Attached Files
File Type: pdf adjust TSO cycle number.pdf (62.7 KB, 262 views)
File Type: pdf testing result 2.pdf (82.4 KB, 227 views)
liaojinyue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2014, 03:40 AM   #18
Simone78
Senior Member
 
Location: Sweden

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 173
Default

Hi,
what you saw here is nothing new for us and we still canīt explain what it is. we also saw a peak around 1.8 Kb when optimizing the protocol using HEK293T (human) cells. When we looked for over-represented sequences in the data we found out that the peak corresponded to a specific transcript called "humanin", which is mitochondrial (!) but has several homologous copies on the genome. While itīs annoying having such a library, the results were not affected. Below please find an example of what we got when we were optimizing Smart-seq2. There you can see we had not only this humanin peak but also a fair amount of primer dimers, but still the performance of our method was superior to the Clontech kit (primer dimers get tagmented with the Nextera kit as well and end up in the final library, thus "wasting" sequencing reads). Sometimes we see it also with mouse cells, but this obviously canīt be humanin which, as the name says, is present only in humans. For the mouse we never found out what it is...what we know is that itīs not a contamination because some of our collaborators reported the same. On the other hand, even when working with single cells this peaks doesnīt always come up. Maybe it depends on how stressed the cells are or how they were sorted? I would also be interested in finding it out!
In conclusion, Smart-seq2 is better than Smart-seq but itīs not perfect, sorry!

I saw that you tried to reduce the amount of TSO. I did few trials on the amount of the different primers. While reducing ISPCR and SMART dT30VN sometimes (sometimes!) helps in reducing the amount of primer dimers, decreasing the TSO usually leads to lower cDNA yield after preampl. Maybe the strand-switch reaction is inefficient and you need to have such a huge amount of TSO even when working with single cells!
Have you tried to sequence some of these libraries? I donīt know what you are interested in, but if you need a lot of reads you might simply multiplex less samples per lane. For most applications (diff expression, detection of isoforms/splice variants) 1 million reads/sample are sufficient and you would get that amount even when pooling 96 samples on a Illumina HiSeq 2000.

We had some concatamer problem in the beginning, but they were due to too much adaptors (TSO, ISCR or oligo dT) compared to the RNA of a cell and we observed that only with very small cells (mostly immune cells which have very little mRNA). If it is an issue, you might try to block the TSO at the 5īend as done by Kapteyn J et al (BMC Genomics 2010, 11:413). Blocking the 5īshould prevent concatamerization of the TSO.

Best,
Simone
Attached Files
File Type: pdf HS-DNA_HEK_rG3-&-LNA_in-sol_KAPA-&_Advantage.pdf (2.62 MB, 242 views)
Simone78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2014, 07:15 AM   #19
jwfoley
Senior Member
 
Location: Stanford

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 171
Default

Maybe one possible problem is the LNAs in the TSO? This is prone to strand invasion (doi:10.1186/1471-2164-14-665), so the LNAs are not a good idea if you care about full-length transcripts. That's why all the other template-switching protocols use riboguanines. If the strand invasion is biased toward specific sites, that could explain these problems.

EDIT: on further inspection, those bands are definitely the characteristic "hedgehog" signal from using unblocked oligos. Block them and it should be fine. I don't know why there are any protocols floating around out there that say blocking is optional; it's so cheap to fix.

Last edited by jwfoley; 06-02-2014 at 07:35 AM.
jwfoley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2014, 09:19 AM   #20
Simone78
Senior Member
 
Location: Sweden

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwfoley View Post
Maybe one possible problem is the LNAs in the TSO? This is prone to strand invasion (doi:10.1186/1471-2164-14-665), so the LNAs are not a good idea if you care about full-length transcripts. That's why all the other template-switching protocols use riboguanines. If the strand invasion is biased toward specific sites, that could explain these problems.

EDIT: on further inspection, those bands are definitely the characteristic "hedgehog" signal from using unblocked oligos. Block them and it should be fine. I don't know why there are any protocols floating around out there that say blocking is optional; it's so cheap to fix.
We use a LNA-containing TSO and always have a better coverage at the 5ī-end of transcripts than the Clontech kit which uses 3 riboG.

In our hands, blocking the TSO led to a (slightly) lower gene detection at all RPKM levels and a (slightly) higher variation between replicates. The unblocked LNA-containing TSO was still performing better, therefore we donīt block the TSO unless the "hedgehog" signal shows up.
Simone78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO